Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Universitätsendowments – Eine Bestandsaufnahme der theoretischen und empirischen Forschung

Zusammenfassung

Obwohl Universitätsendowments eine lange Tradition aufweisen, hat deren Beitrag zu den operativen Budgets gerade in den letzten Jahren signifikant zugenommen. Von akademischer Seite besteht starkes Interesse am Verhalten und der Performance von Endowments, die eine wichtige Klasse institutioneller Investoren darstellen. Der vorliegende Artikel gibt einen Überblick über die akademische Literatur im aufstrebenden Forschungsgebiet der Universitätsendowments. Dabei klassifizieren wir die Arbeiten in vier Teilbereiche: (1) Governance befasst sich mit der Organisationsstruktur und dem Investment Policy Statement; (2) Asset Allocation behandelt den theoretischen Rahmen und empirische Analysen sowohl über die Zeit als auch für verschiedene Typen von Endowments; (3) Performance diskutiert die (risiko-adjustierte) Performance und unterscheidet nach Typen und Größe; (4) Ausschüttungen stellt den Zusammenhang zur theoretischen Literatur dar und beschreibt die Ausschüttungspraxis von Universitäten. Wir kommen zu dem Schluss, dass die fortgeschrittenen Methoden moderner finanzwirtschaftlicher Theorie und empirischer Analyse eine wertvolle Perspektive für das Verständnis von Universitätsendowments bieten. Dennoch heben wir mehrere Herausforderungen für zukünftige Forschung hervor.

Abstract

While university endowments have a long history, their contribution to operating budgets has gained considerable significance in recent years. Further as an important class of institutional investor there is strong interest in behavior and performance from the academic research side. This paper surveys the literature in the emerging field of scientific research studies concerning university endowments. We classify papers into four areas. (1) Organization, which pertains to governance structure and the investment policy statement; (2) asset allocation, where we discuss the main theoretical framework and the relevant observations both across time and for type of endowment; (3) performance, in which (risk-adjusted) performance is discussed and distinguished by type and size of endowment; (4) spending, which discusses the relation to the classical views and theoretical literature as well as what university endowments do in practice. We find that the modern framework for theoretical and empirical analysis can provide a very useful perspective for understanding the role of endowments. Nonetheless we highlight several challenges that should form the basis for future research agendas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6
Abb. 7
Abb. 8
Abb. 9

Notes

  1. 1.

    Die Gremien von US Endowments entsprechen nicht der in Kontinentaleuropa üblichen Form wie etwa Vorstand und Aufsichtsrat. Üblicherweise besteht ein Board aus operativ leitenden und nur beaufsichtigenden Mitgliedern.

  2. 2.

    Das Signifikanzniveau wird in den Tabellen mit * (90 %), ** (95 %) und *** (99 %) angegeben.

  3. 3.

    SAT ist ein standardisierter Test für die Aufnahme in ein US College.

  4. 4.

    Der Begriff „Trustee“ könnte im Kontext eines Endowments am ehesten mit dem deutschen Wort „Treuhänder“ wiedergegeben werden. Das entsprechende Gremium wird häufig als „Board of Trustees“ oder einfach „Board“ bezeichnet.

  5. 5.

    Wenn die Risikoaversion unendlich ist, folgt \(\sigma_{*}^{2}=0\) für das optimale Portfolio. Woglom (2003) diskutiert diese Formel unter Vernachlässigung des Risikoterms und unterstreicht, dass es einen Konnex zwischen den erwarteten Endowmentrenditen und dem Grad der Risikoaversion geben muss.

Literatur

  1. Acharya S, Dimson E (2007) Endowment asset management – investment strategies in Oxford and Cambridge. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  2. Bajeux-Besnainou I, Ogunc K (2006) Spending rules for endowment funds: a dynamic model with subsistence levels. Rev Quant Finance Account 27(1):93–107

  3. Barber BM, Wang G (2012) Do (some) university endowments earn alpha? SSRN working paper 1972317

  4. Barberis N (2000) Investing in the long run when returns are predictable. J Finance 55(1):225–264

  5. Blume ME (2010) Endowment spending in volatile markets: what should fiduciaries do? Rev Quant Finance Account 35(2):163–178

  6. Brinson G, Hood R, Beebower G (1986) Determinants of portfolio performance. Financ Anal J 42(2):39–44

  7. Brown JR, Dimmock SG, Kang J-K, Weisbenner S (2012) How university endowments respond to financial market shocks: evidence and implications. NBER working paper 15861

  8. Brown JR, Dimmock S, Kang J-K, Richardson D, Weisbenner S (2011) The governance of university endowments: insights from a TIAA-CREF institute survey. Research dialogue. TIAA-CREF institute

  9. Brown KC, Garlappi L, Tiu C (2007) The troves of academe: asset allocation, risk budgeting and investment performance of university endowment funds. McCombs research paper series No. FIN-03-07

  10. Brown KC, Garlappi L, Tiu C (2010) Asset allocation and portfolio performance: evidence from university endowment funds. J Financ Mark 13(2):268–294

  11. Brown W (1999) University endowments: investment strategies and performance. Financ Practice Educat 9(2):61–69

  12. Campbell JY, Viceira LM (1999) Consumption and portfolio decisions when expected returns are time varying. Q J Econ 114(2):433–495

  13. Carhart M (1997) On persistance in mutual fund returns. J Finance 52(1):57–82

  14. Chen J, Hughson E, Stoughton N (2012) Strategic mutual fund tournaments. SSRN working paper 2023805

  15. Coiner HM (1990) The lognormality of university endowment in the far future and its implications. Econ Educ Rev 9(2):157–161

  16. Core JE, Donaldson T (2010) An economic and ethical approach to charity and to charity endowments. Rev Sco Econ 68(3):261–284

  17. Dimmock S (2012) Background risk and university endowment funds. Rev Econ Stat 94(3):789–799

  18. Dybvig PH (1999) Using asset allocation to protect spending. Financ Anal J 55(1):49–62

  19. Ellis CD (1970) Let’s solve the endowment crisis. Harvard Business Review, March–April, 92–102

  20. Fama E, French K (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. J Financ Econ 33(1):3–56

  21. Fraser SP, Jennings WW (2010) Examining the use of investment policy statements. J Wealth Manag 13(2):10–22

  22. Fung W, Hsieh D (2004) Hedge fund benchmarks: a risk-based approach. Financ Anal J 60(5):65–80

  23. Gilbert T, Hrdlicka C (2012) Fairness and risk-sharing across generations: an application to university and nonprofit endowments. SSRN working paper 2072323

  24. Goetzmann WN, Oster S (2012) Competition among university endowments. NBER working paper 18173

  25. Heinzel H (2004) Philanthropy and fundraising in Western Europe within a framework of change. New Direct Philanthrop Fund 46:101–120

  26. Ho GP, Mozes HA, Greenfield P (2010) The sustainability of endowment spending levels: a wake-up call for university endowments. J Portf Manag 37(1):133–146

  27. Humphreys J, Electris C, Fapohunda Y, Filosa J, Goldstein J, Grace K (2010) Educational endowments and the financial crisis: social costs and systemic risks in the shadow banking system. Center for Social Philantrophy, Tellus Institute

  28. Kaufman RT, Woglom G (2005) Modifying endowment spending rules: is it the cure for overspending? J Educ Finance 31(2):146–171

  29. Lerner J, Schoar A, Wang J (2008) Secrets of the academy: the drivers of university endowment success. J Econ Perspect 22(3):207–222

  30. Lerner J, Schoar A, Wongsunwai W (2007) Smart institutions, foolish choices: the limited partner performance puzzle. J Finance 62(2):731–764

  31. Lindahl WE, Conley AT (2002) Literature review: philanthropic fundraising. Nonprofit Manag Leadership 13(1):91–112

  32. Litvack JM, Malkiel BG, Quandt RE (1974) A plan for the definition of endowment income. Am Econ Rev 64(2):433–437

  33. Malkiel BG, Firstenberg PB (1976) Managing risk in an uncertain era. An analysis for endowed institutions. Princeton University, Princeton

  34. Merton RC (1971) Optimum consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous-time model. J Econ Theory 3(4):373–413

  35. Merton RC (1993) Optimal investment strategies for university endowment funds. In: Clotfelter CT, Rothschild M (Hrsg) Studies of supply and demand in higher education. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, S 211–242

  36. NACUBO-Commonfund (2012) NACUBO commonfund study of endowments

  37. Nichols DA (1974) The investment income formula of the American Economic Association. Am Econ Rev 64(2):420–426

  38. Princeton University (2010) Report of the treasurer, Princeton University endowment report. Princeton University, Princeton

  39. Rogers F (2005) Sources of endowment growth at colleges and universities commonfund

  40. Sedlacek VO, Jarvis WF (2010) Endowment spending: building a stronger policy framework. Commonfund

  41. Sharpe W (1992) Asset allocation: management style and performance measurement. J Portf Manag 18(2):7–19

  42. Siegel JJ (2008) Stocks for the long run, 4. Aufl. McGraw-Hill, New York

  43. Swensen DF (2009) Pioneering portfolio management: an unconventional approach to institutional investment. The Free Press, New York

  44. Tobin J (1974) What is permanent endowment income? Am Econ Assoc 64(2):427–432

  45. Tseng Y-F, Griswold J, Goetzmann WN (2010) Educational endowments in crises. J Portf Manag 36(4):112–123

  46. Tuckman HP (1998) Competition, commercialization, and the evolution of nonprofit organizational structures. J Policy Anal Manage 17(2):175–194

  47. Woglom G (2003) Endowment spending rates, intergenerational equity and the sources of capital gains. Econ Educ Rev 22(6):591–601

  48. Yale University (2010) The Yale endowment 2010. New Haven

Download references

Danksagung

Die Autoren danken drei anonymen Gutachtern sowie Engelbert Dockner (Herausgeber) für ihre konstruktiven Kommentare. Wir danken weiters Florian Mandl für wertvolle Hinweise und Alexandra Fichtinger für redaktionelle Unterstützung.

Author information

Correspondence to Georg Cejnek.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cejnek, G., Franz, R., Randl, O. et al. Universitätsendowments – Eine Bestandsaufnahme der theoretischen und empirischen Forschung. J Betriebswirtsch 62, 225–260 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-012-0087-4

Download citation

Schlüsselwörter

  • Universitätsendowments
  • Performance
  • Asset Allocation

JEL Klassifikationen

  • G10
  • G11
  • G23